21 Dec
2009
21 Dec
'09
9:29 p.m.
Hi Stef,
In general, in the new famix we named variables based on the types
they point to.
In this case we have:
ScopingEntity
-- Namespace
-- Package
In each ScopingEntity we point to other "childScopes" :), but in fact
in each Package we point to Packages and in a Namespace we point to
Namespaces. So we could leave childScopes as a polymorphic property
between Package and Namespace and have the actual implementation in
the subclasses.
Cheers,
Doru
On 21 Dec 2009, at 19:36, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
For me childScopes does not reveal its intention.
I do not understand what it use for.
Stef
On Dec 21, 2009, at 7:04 PM, Tudor Girba wrote:
--
www.tudorgirba.com
"What is more important: To be happy, or to make happy?"
Hi,
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev If I have a FAMIXNamespace, how do I obtain a
reference to the
model that contains this namespace?
namespace mooseModel
FAMIXNamespace has child scopes instead of
namespaces, which makes
it ugly to define a Glamour tree view on models and their
namespaces. I have therefore added the code below, I think it
would be a good idea to add that to the core as well.
FAMIXNamespace>>allNamespaces
^ self childScopes
Indeed, this part will probably need rethinking a bit. Probably the
best thing is to define childScopes as derived and override it in
the subclasses to offer uniform interface between Namespace and
Package. So, basically we could have the same pattern as with
belongsTo:
FAMIXNamespace>>childScopes
<MSEProperty ... > <derived>
^ self namespaces
FAMIXPackage>>childScopes
<MSEProperty ... > <derived>
^ self packages
What do you think?
Cheers,
Doru
--
www.tudorgirba.com
"No matter how many recipes we know, we still value a chef."
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev